Need help with lens mount identification.

Dewman · 10-27-2015, 01:32 PM

It is a Hanimex 135mm f:2.8 prime. It's a super clean little lens that appears to be very well made, but, alas, it is NOT a Pentax-K mount. Any clues?

Last edited by Dewman; 01-02-2016 at 07:09 AM.

zzeitg · 10-27-2015, 01:50 PM

The Hanimex MC 135 mm f/ 2.8 Lens. Specs. MTF Charts. User Reviews.

Seems like this lens used to be available in quite many different mounts...

**boriscleto** · 10-27-2015, 01:55 PM

~~I think it's Konica AR.~~

It is Konica AR.

The position of the bayonet lug with the notch, and the AE on the aperture ring are the identifiers. Konica had the shortest focal flange distance of any 35mm SLR, so it is pretty much useless on anything other than a mirrorless.

Dewman · 10-27-2015, 03:04 PM

Originally posted by boriscleto

~~I think it's Konica AR.~~

It is Konica AR.

The position of the bayonet lug with the notch, and the AE on the aperture ring are the identifiers. Konica had the shortest focal flange distance of any 35mm SLR, so it is pretty much useless on anything other than a mirrorless.

Hmmm.... What brand of mirror-less camera? Not that it matters much, being that it's an old-school lens to begin with. Such a shame to see such fine craftsmanship that went into building such a lens, only to have it go to the landfill.

If anyone reading this has any use for it, PM me and it's yours. It even comes in a very nice, zippered black leather hard case!

bertwert · 10-27-2015, 03:11 PM

You could reverse mount it and use it for macro.

KDD · 10-27-2015, 03:20 PM

It say "E" I think Canon E mount.

**boriscleto** · 10-27-2015, 03:29 PM

Originally posted by KDD

It say "E" I think Canon E mount.

No. Canon EF mount does not have a mechanical aperture linkage, and there re no electrical contacts.

**boriscleto** · 10-27-2015, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by Dewman

Hmmm.... What brand of mirror-less camera?

Any mirrorless that has a register of less than 40mm. So any except the K-01

**MJSfoto1956** · 10-27-2015, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by boriscleto

Konica had the shortest focal flange distance of any 35mm SLR, so it is pretty much useless on anything other than a mirrorless.

or if the lens performs reasonably well optically @ 1:2, then you could use it for close up work with a glassless adapter or pretty much any bellows + adapters.

M

osv · 10-27-2015, 04:22 PM

The Lens Mount Guide: Part 3 - KEH Camera Blog

bc got it right, konica.

legacy 135/2.8 and 3.5 lenses are dirt cheap, nobody wants 'em, despite the fact that they can all be used on mirrorless... keh recently gave me $5 for a pristine 135/3.5 tak; it had a perfect case, caps, and even a hood, it looked like it had hardly ever been used.

stillshot2 · 10-27-2015, 06:43 PM

Originally posted by osv

keh recently gave me $5 for a pristine 135/3.5 tak; it had a perfect case, caps, and even a hood, it looked like it had hardly ever been used.

Ouch! Why didn't you just hold onto it?

osv · 10-27-2015, 07:59 PM

i mostly shoot mirrorless, and i had 7 or 8 slow 135's, in all kinds of mounts... i did a landscape type of shootout, they were all sharp but all had the same ca problems, nothing really stood out, and keh offered $13(?) for the tak with their online estimating tool... it seemed like a high bid, and i was moving away from m42 as a mount; it's great on crop, but the pentax-m lenses are generally better in the corners on ff.

so i sent the 135 tak in, with some other glass, and keh lowered their quotes on every piece of glass i sent 'em, which was weird, because this is the third or fourth time that i've sold 'em a batch of lenses, never had an issue before.

i since picked up a tiny pentax-m 135/3.5, hoping that it'll rock on ff like the m28/3.5 and the m35/2.8 do.

moral of the story is that i haven't seen a bad 135mm prime on ff... konica, minolta, pentax, canon, etc, all look decent on ff, and that hanimex probably does to; so don't pay much for any 135mm lens.

legacy wide lenses on ff are a totally different story, it's the exact opposite situation :-/ full-on nightmare.

elementdtlop · 10-28-2015, 12:02 PM

Originally posted by osv

legacy wide lenses on ff are a totally different story, it's the exact opposite situation :-/ full-on nightmare.

are you speaking generally across the board or more lens specific? I have a vivitar 28mm 2.8 that is beautiful on asp-c and that specific model(produced by komine iirc?) is very highly regarded for the price while other 28mm's showed less favorable results or had oily blades or such. how wide are you talking like fish eye or super wide like 18-22mm or up to like 28mm(~18mm ASP-c) and are you talking about experiences with other brand's digital ff's with brand or 3rd party lenses or pentax and others film cameras and brand or 3rd party glass? i know pentax's own line of legacy WA lenses is typically pretty highly regarded aside from a few, but older third party lenses were def much more sporadic.

I'm just wondering what your experiences were/are to make you feel this way. I'm not criticizing in any way. i have 0 film/ff experience. I'm just curious considering the implications it has with the new FF should i get one down the road. I would definitely consider some of the FA lineup at the very least, and depending on my needs, may extend to older glass like the A line's wider glass.
much appreciated.

osv · 10-28-2015, 03:45 PM

i started out with a 24mm legacy prime fixation on the k10d; i was shooting cars then, but with ff i was interested in lenses for landscape use, and studying the old film resolution test numbers proved to be reliable for 36mp ff digital: http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/pentax_superwide.html

blow these landscape test photos up to 100%, you can follow the ff saga through several 24mm comparison rounds:
24mm camera lens shootout, on the Sony a7R: first round

since 24mm was weak on ff, i moved to testing 28mm, which proved to be much better on 36mp:
28mm Camera Lens Comparison, Sony a7R: Sigma MiniWide II, Albinar ADG, Vivitar 28mm f:2.0
28mm prime lens comparison, shot on Sony a7R: second round

now i'm looking at 35mm primes:
35mm prime lens comparison shootout, on the Sony a7R, first round
35mm lens comparison, second round, Minolta 35/2.8 & Pentax FA35/2, on the Sony a7R.

the gist of it is:
1) ~50% of everything i tested was decentered to some degree, including the fa35, and that trumps most everything.
2) the fa35 is a winner on ff; the liveview peaking function works very well, which means that it has a lot of contrast.
3) at 28mm and up, pentax wide lenses are really good for shooting landscapes on ff.
4) pretty much all of the legacy wide glass needs to be stopped down heavily to be clean across the frame.

10-27-2015, 01:32 PM	#1
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492	Need help with lens mount identification. It is a Hanimex 135mm f:2.8 prime. It's a super clean little lens that appears to be very well made, but, alas, it is NOT a Pentax-K mount. Any clues? Last edited by Dewman; 01-02-2016 at 07:09 AM.

10-27-2015, 07:59 PM	#12
osv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: So Cal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,080	i mostly shoot mirrorless, and i had 7 or 8 slow 135's, in all kinds of mounts... i did a landscape type of shootout, they were all sharp but all had the same ca problems, nothing really stood out, and keh offered $13(?) for the tak with their online estimating tool... it seemed like a high bid, and i was moving away from m42 as a mount; it's great on crop, but the pentax-m lenses are generally better in the corners on ff. so i sent the 135 tak in, with some other glass, and keh lowered their quotes on every piece of glass i sent 'em, which was weird, because this is the third or fourth time that i've sold 'em a batch of lenses, never had an issue before. i since picked up a tiny pentax-m 135/3.5, hoping that it'll rock on ff like the m28/3.5 and the m35/2.8 do. moral of the story is that i haven't seen a bad 135mm prime on ff... konica, minolta, pentax, canon, etc, all look decent on ff, and that hanimex probably does to; so don't pay much for any 135mm lens. legacy wide lenses on ff are a totally different story, it's the exact opposite situation :-/ full-on nightmare. Last edited by osv; 10-27-2015 at 08:04 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Lens identification help?	Daniel Miller	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	01-17-2015 04:04 PM
lens mount identification help request	fleurdelis	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	09-10-2011 01:16 PM
Help with K1000 lens and accessory identification?	2112	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	02-14-2011 01:58 PM
Help: lens mount identification, interchangeable mount identification	m88k	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	1	08-28-2010 06:20 PM
Need Help with Photographer Identification	Damn Brit	General Talk	7	12-14-2009 04:34 AM

10-27-2015, 01:50 PM	#2
zzeitg Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: South Bohemia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,017	The Hanimex MC 135 mm f/ 2.8 Lens. Specs. MTF Charts. User Reviews. Seems like this lens used to be available in quite many different mounts...

10-27-2015, 01:55 PM	#3
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	~~I think it's Konica AR.~~ It is Konica AR. The position of the bayonet lug with the notch, and the AE on the aperture ring are the identifiers. Konica had the shortest focal flange distance of any 35mm SLR, so it is pretty much useless on anything other than a mirrorless.

10-27-2015, 03:04 PM	#4
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492 Original Poster	Originally posted by boriscleto ~~I think it's Konica AR.~~ It is Konica AR. The position of the bayonet lug with the notch, and the AE on the aperture ring are the identifiers. Konica had the shortest focal flange distance of any 35mm SLR, so it is pretty much useless on anything other than a mirrorless. Hmmm.... What brand of mirror-less camera? Not that it matters much, being that it's an old-school lens to begin with. Such a shame to see such fine craftsmanship that went into building such a lens, only to have it go to the landfill. If anyone reading this has any use for it, PM me and it's yours. It even comes in a very nice, zippered black leather hard case!

10-27-2015, 03:11 PM	#5
bertwert Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Golden, BC Posts: 15,173	You could reverse mount it and use it for macro.

10-27-2015, 03:20 PM	#6
KDD Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 403	It say "E" I think Canon E mount.

10-27-2015, 03:29 PM	#7
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by KDD It say "E" I think Canon E mount. No. Canon EF mount does not have a mechanical aperture linkage, and there re no electrical contacts.

10-27-2015, 03:30 PM	#8
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by Dewman Hmmm.... What brand of mirror-less camera? Any mirrorless that has a register of less than 40mm. So any except the K-01

10-27-2015, 04:01 PM	#9
MJSfoto1956 Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Boston Posts: 1,305	Originally posted by boriscleto Konica had the shortest focal flange distance of any 35mm SLR, so it is pretty much useless on anything other than a mirrorless. or if the lens performs reasonably well optically @ 1:2, then you could use it for close up work with a glassless adapter or pretty much any bellows + adapters. M

10-27-2015, 04:22 PM	#10
osv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: So Cal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,080	The Lens Mount Guide: Part 3 - KEH Camera Blog bc got it right, konica. legacy 135/2.8 and 3.5 lenses are dirt cheap, nobody wants 'em, despite the fact that they can all be used on mirrorless... keh recently gave me $5 for a pristine 135/3.5 tak; it had a perfect case, caps, and even a hood, it looked like it had hardly ever been used.

10-27-2015, 06:43 PM	#11
stillshot2 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,070	Originally posted by osv keh recently gave me $5 for a pristine 135/3.5 tak; it had a perfect case, caps, and even a hood, it looked like it had hardly ever been used. Ouch! Why didn't you just hold onto it?

10-28-2015, 12:02 PM	#13
elementdtlop Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 97	Originally posted by osv legacy wide lenses on ff are a totally different story, it's the exact opposite situation :-/ full-on nightmare. are you speaking generally across the board or more lens specific? I have a vivitar 28mm 2.8 that is beautiful on asp-c and that specific model(produced by komine iirc?) is very highly regarded for the price while other 28mm's showed less favorable results or had oily blades or such. how wide are you talking like fish eye or super wide like 18-22mm or up to like 28mm(~18mm ASP-c) and are you talking about experiences with other brand's digital ff's with brand or 3rd party lenses or pentax and others film cameras and brand or 3rd party glass? i know pentax's own line of legacy WA lenses is typically pretty highly regarded aside from a few, but older third party lenses were def much more sporadic. I'm just wondering what your experiences were/are to make you feel this way. I'm not criticizing in any way. i have 0 film/ff experience. I'm just curious considering the implications it has with the new FF should i get one down the road. I would definitely consider some of the FA lineup at the very least, and depending on my needs, may extend to older glass like the A line's wider glass. much appreciated.

10-28-2015, 03:45 PM	#14
osv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: So Cal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,080	i started out with a 24mm legacy prime fixation on the k10d; i was shooting cars then, but with ff i was interested in lenses for landscape use, and studying the old film resolution test numbers proved to be reliable for 36mp ff digital: http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/pentax_superwide.html blow these landscape test photos up to 100%, you can follow the ff saga through several 24mm comparison rounds: 24mm camera lens shootout, on the Sony a7R: first round since 24mm was weak on ff, i moved to testing 28mm, which proved to be much better on 36mp: 28mm Camera Lens Comparison, Sony a7R: Sigma MiniWide II, Albinar ADG, Vivitar 28mm f:2.0 28mm prime lens comparison, shot on Sony a7R: second round now i'm looking at 35mm primes: 35mm prime lens comparison shootout, on the Sony a7R, first round 35mm lens comparison, second round, Minolta 35/2.8 & Pentax FA35/2, on the Sony a7R. the gist of it is: 1) ~50% of everything i tested was decentered to some degree, including the fa35, and that trumps most everything. 2) the fa35 is a winner on ff; the liveview peaking function works very well, which means that it has a lot of contrast. 3) at 28mm and up, pentax wide lenses are really good for shooting landscapes on ff. 4) pretty much all of the legacy wide glass needs to be stopped down heavily to be clean across the frame.